© All Rights Reserved

5 views

© All Rights Reserved

- CONTROL AND MONITORING
- EEE 352 Automatic Control Systems General Course Information
- Control Lab All Exp and Reports in Single PDF [Abdullah Ibn Mahmud]
- From PID to Active Disturbance Rejection Control
- Automation 1
- Reference Tracking Control of Hypersonic Vehicles Using Switched Linear Parameter-Varying Approach _IEEE
- Design of Multi-objective Robust HVDC Supplementary Controller Based on Global Signal
- 2000 IEEE TCST Canudas Praly
- Nonlinear Predictive Proportional Integral Controller for Multiple Time Constants
- Special Section_ Know when to look outside the PID tuning - ISA.pdf
- 2013_SysTol_v3
- DC Motor Position and PID Parametros Do Atuador Motor DC
- Lpm 3_2 Introduction
- Model predictive control of DFIG-based wind turbines.pdf
- pmsm speed control
- PID2DOF.pdf
- Eee342 Assi Sep2014
- dsc_exercises.pdf
- 250269
- PDC lab 8

You are on page 1of 6

CHALLENGE CONTROL PROBLEM

Venkatarao Ryali ,1 Kannan M. Moudgalya

Dept. of Chemical Engineering, IIT Bombay,

kannan@che.iitb.ac.in

Abstract: The industrial challenge polymer control problem posed by Chylla and

Haase has been solved by a variant of Quantitative Feedback Theory. This is

facilitated by a transfer function model with a set of uncertain parameters, arrived

at after simplifying and linearizing the nonlinear model. The control algorithm only

requires the reaction temperature measurement, does not involve any complicated

parameter estimation, and is structurally of low complexity. Simulation studies

with the nonlinear plant model demonstrate the efficacy of this controller.

Keywords: Robust control, Temperature control, Semibatch reactor, Emulsion

polymerization, Quantitative feedback theory

1. INTRODUCTION

High value added specialty chemicals are often

produced in semibatch mode. Control of semibatch reactors is difficult, thanks to the unsteady

state nature of the process, complex nonlinear

behaviour and highly uncertain dynamics. Chylla

and Haase (1993b) have given details of such

a reactor as a challenge control problem. There

have been only a few solutions to this problem

(Helbig et al., 1996; Clarke-Pringle and MacGregor, 1997; Ryali and Moudgalya, 1998).

Helbig et al. (1996) and Clarke-Pringle and MacGregor (1997) have used model predictive control strategies to solve this problem. There have

been some inconsistencies in the formulation of

the problem (Chylla and Haase, 1993a; Helbig

et al., 1996) If the initial charge refers to the

polymer only, it becomes an easy problem. Ryali

and Moudgalya (1998) solve the easy problem

using a variant of Quantitative Feedback Theory.

1

polymer and water, it becomes a difficult problem. In this work, we solve the difficult problem.

We present in detail the methodology adopted to

arrive at a transfer function model of the system along with an uncertainty description. We

also present the frequency domain requirement,

control design approach and carry out simulation

studies.

2. LINEARIZATION OF SYSTEM MODEL

The actual system model can be transformed into

the following set of delay-differential equations.

dx

= G1 (x, 1 , 2 ) F(x) + G2 (x, c, 1 , 2 ) (1)

dt

Here x denotes the state vector with five components x1 to x5 . The control variable, denoted by c,

refers to the valve opening. See the Nomenclature

and Appendix A for further details. The ideal

control effort (in terms of the jacket inlet temperature) required for isothermal conditions can be

calculated by solving Eq. 1 with x3 x3d , where,

xd denotes the desired state. It has been found

Table 1. Bounds on

1min (dimensionless)

1max (dimensionless)

2min (dimensionless)

2max (dimensionless)

min (Btu/f t2 /min/o F )

U

max (Btu/f t2 /min/o F )

U

hmin (f t2 )

A

hmax (f t2 )

A

1.73

16.65

5.35 103

0.8

0.469

2.37

6.59

9.33

that the required efforts for with and without delays are about the same. Hence, we use the model,

with delays assumed zero, to design control:

dx

= G1 (x) F(x) + G2 (x, c)

(2)

dt

Assuming that we can get perfect control, we

replace F(x) with F(xd ):

dx

= G1 (x) F(xd ) + G2 (x, c)

(3)

dt

Furthermore, as the variation in F(xd )(t) with

time is slow, we replace it with a constant matrix

Ah )]T , where,

and Ah are the con = [

F

(U

, U

0.4

stant replacements of (xd ), U (xd ) and Ah (xd ),

respectively. To account for the variation in the

, and

latter parameters with time, we allow

, U

min ,

max ],

min , U

max ], and [Ahmin , Ahmax ], respectively,

[U

such that 0.4 (xd )(t) [

min ,

max ], U (xd )(t)

min , U

max ], and Ah (xd )(t) [Ahmin , Ahmax ],

[U

at each instant of time t, during all the batches.

These bounds are obtained as follows:

: In general, the ideal average

Bounds for U

jacket temperature Tj required to maintain the

desired isothermal state have been calculated

and found to lie, roughly, within a 10% band

about x3d . This implies that the corresponding

Twall [0.95x3d , 1.05x3d ]. Considering larger

bounds for Twall , that is allowing Twall

[0.8x3d , 1.2x3d ], to account for mild variations

min and U

max can

from the ideal behaviour, U

be computed as

min = U (fmax , (1/hf )max , (Twall = 0.8x3d ))

U

Kp can be written as

Kp = K p 1 K p 2

(4)

Kp1 = kv Rfv (c(t)) Tv

Kp 2 = k v R

fv (c(t))

x5

(5)

(6)

or

(kvh , Tsteam , (c(t)/50 2)), depending on whether

the mode of control is either cooling or heating,

respectively; see Appendix A.

During both the cooling and heating modes, as

long as c(t) = 50%, the multiple (kv Rfv (c(t)) )

of x5 in Eq. 6 takes values in the interval

[2min , 2max ], where

2min = (min{kvc , kvh }) R0.98

2max = max{kvc , kvh }

Therefore, we modify Kp2 to

Kp 2 = 2 x 5

(7)

[2min , 2max ], which is essentially the conic approximation (Friedland, 1996). We use this idea

in the modification of Kp1 as well. We make the

assumption that the manipulated pressure signal

Pc (t) constituting the control input c(t), lies in

the standard range [3, 15] psig. That is,

c(t) =

Pc (t) 3

12

100

of the pressure range, i.e., Pc (t) = Pc (t) 9,

c(t) =

U

Note that these values hold for both the products A and B, and for all the process parameter

values, see Table 1.

Bounds for Ah : Ahmin and Ahmax are the values of the heat transfer area at the beginning

and the end of the reaction, respectively. These

values are given in Table 1.

Bounds for

:

min = (fmin , x3d + 1) and

have been computed assuming a 1o F variation about the desired reactor temperature x3d ,

which is the allowed variation in performance.

Pc (t) + 6

12

100

Pc (t)

6

R(c(t)/50) = R

, which is obtained as

Pc is varied between 6 psig and 0 psig. This

plot can be seen to be bound by the family of

lines:

Lc = {m

Pc

6

| 6 Pc 0; m [mmin , mmax ]}

lower bound for m is the slope of the line OB

tangential to the valve flow characteristic in the

opening direction. The upper bound is the slope of

the line OA passing through the points (0, 0) and

(0.02, R0.98 ), the latter of which corresponds to

the flow ratio at c = 49%. As shown in Fig. 1, this

family of lines Lc , accounts for almost any flow,

mode, Kp1 in Equation (5) may be modified to

Kp 1 =

m kvc

Tinlet

Pc

6

n01

d01

d03

d12

d14

d22

6 Pc (t) 0

the heating mode as well, to

Kp1 = m kvh Tsteam

Pc

6

3.48 102

2.02 102

1.62 104

3.937

0.0449

1.493

n11

d02

d11

d13

d21

d23

6.62 103

3.49 102

7.66 103

0.029

1.498

0.03

0 Pc (t) 6

Kp1 = 1 u(t)

(8)

1min = min{kvc Tinlet , kvh Tsteam (mmin /6),

1max = max{kvc Tinlet , kvh Tsteam } (mmax /6).

Thus, from Eq. 4,7,8, the modified expression for

Kp can be written as

Kp = 2 x5 + 1 u(t)

(9)

substituting the linear expresF(xd )(t) with F,

sion for Kp and linearizing about (xd , cd ), Eq. 3

becomes,

dx

= P(t) x + Q u(t)

(10)

dt

y = x3

(11)

where indicates that deviation variables are

being used. Eq. 11 is the incremental output equation. The P(t) and Q matrices are defined in

Appendix A. Calculations have shown that P(t)

can be approximated as P(0). There is still a

discontinuity in the element p33 (t) at the instants

when switchover from the feed to the hold phase

and vice versa (for Product B), take place. But

since the magnitude of this discontinuity, characterized by the parameter (see the Appendix), is

small, p33 (t) can be adequately approximated by

the following value:

Ah (U A)loss

M Wm Fm Cpm U

p33 =

D(xd (0))

where the numerator is obtained as an average

of the respective values over the feed and hold

phases. This assumption helps in defining a transfer function from u to x3 , that is the same

over both the feed and hold phases and for both

products. This transfer function model denoted as

PL (s, ), is given as follows.

n1 s + n 0

(12)

PL (s, ) = 3

s + d 2 s2 + d 1 s + d 0

Ah

n0 = n01 1 U

Ah

n1 = n11 1 U

Ah + d03 U

Ah

d0 = d01 2 + d02 2 U

Ah + d14 U

Ah

d1 = d11 + d12 2 + d13 2 U

Ah

d2 = d21 + d22 2 + d23 U

The values of the parameters nij and dij are given

in Table 2. The uncertain parameters figuring

in the coefficients of this transfer function are

Ah ]T . Note

lumped as the vector = [1 2 U

that

does not figure in any of the coefficients,

and therefore, bounds for

need not be defined.

The hyper-rectangle defined by the bounds on

will be denoted as .

3. DESIGN APPROACH

We propose to design a controller C(s) that has a

single input, the deviation of the reactor temperature from the setpoint, as shown in Fig. (2). In

this diagram, the error involved by the linearization is modelled as output disturbance signal d(t).

As it is model induced, it is assumed that d(t) will

have spectral components only in the bandwidth

of the plant, PL (s, ). We require that the transfer

function between from d(t) to x3 , viz. the sensitivity transfer function

) = 1/(1 + PL (s, ) C(s))

S(s,

be minimized over the frequency range in which

the spectra of d(t) are concentrated. We arrive at

the following requirement: Design a fixed, stabiliz

ing controller C(s) such that |S(j,

)| < < 1

over , . We chose = 0.891 (corresponding

to 1 dB). The design of C(s) can be iteratively

improved upon by recursively reducing . From

the transfer function of the system, we find that

= [0, 1.2] rad/min. For a detailed discussion, the

reader is referred to Ryali and Moudgalya (1998).

The transfer function in Eq. 12 can be shown to

be stable for all . It generates a band of Nyquist

plots, as is varied in . For example, the Nyquist

locus of PL (j1.2, ), , is enclosed within the

region R shown in Fig. 3. The boundary of R

is defined by the extremal phase and magnitude

values of the locus PL (j1.2, ). For brevity, regions

like R are not shown for other frequencies .

Instead, the orientation of the Nyquist band as

0 and , is shown. The FD spec

defined above requires that all such loci PL (j, ),

, lie outside the circle centred at the

zero or negative phase over will destabilize

the closed-loop system while trying to meet the

sensitivity magnitude requirement. Thus, C(s)

should exhibit phase lead at least over . A

candidate lead controller is the following

(13)

been chosen arbitrarily with the only requirement

being that their geometric mean be 1.62 rad/min

so that the maximum phase lead can be provided

at this frequency. This helps in choosing a relatively smaller value for K to satisfy the sensitivity

magnitude requirement. The minimum value of K

that satisfies the given FD spec is slightly less than

19. The problem of noise associated with high

frequency components is mitigated by adding faroff poles, as discussed in Ryali and Moudgalya

(1998). Thus we arrive at the controller,

C(s) =

K(s + 0.1)

(0.0695s + 1)(0.001s + 1)

i = 1.2, 1/hf = 0.004, noiseless measurement

locus of PL (j1.2, )

K(s + 0.1)

C1 (s) =

(0.0695s + 1)

(14)

is stabilizing. All the loop shaping computations

have been performed using software developed by

Ryali (Ryali, 1994).

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The ODEs describing the closed-loop system,

which involve Eq. 1 and a state-space realization of controller C(s), have been solved using LSODE. Hysteresis is also accounted for

during the simulations. The simulations have

been performed for various values of the uncertain parameters: i [0.8, 1.2], and 1/hf

{0, 0.001, 0.002, 0.003, 0.004}, under both winter

and summer conditions.

In all the simulations, (1 , 2 ) = (1nom , 2nom ) =

(0.38, 0.25) min. Also, it is assumed that at the

beginning of the monomer feed phase (t = 0 min),

Fig. 5. Jacket inlet temperature: Summer operation, i = 1.2, 1/hf = 0.004; Solid line - actual

profile; Circles - ideal profile

the reaction temperature is at its setpoint value.

These assumptions are relaxed later.

For brevity, we show the simulation results for

product A only. Fig. 4-7 show the results of the

closed loop simulation for two extreme situations:

summer operation with i = 1.2 and 1/hf =

0.004, and winter operation with i = 0.8 and

1/hf = 0. Fig. 4, 5 correspond to the case when

there is maximum exothermicity, whereas Fig. 6,7

correspond to the minimum exothermicity case.

In both the cases, the heat transfer surface fouling

coefficient is at its maximum value. Deviations in

the reaction temperature about the setpoint are

controlled to well within the desired limit of 1o F .

The sudden stoppage of the monomer feed after

70 minutes into the reaction causes the derivative

of the reaction temperature to increase suddenly.

Since the controller has a large lead (derivative)

action, this causes a relatively sharp dip in the

jacket inlet temperature for a very short period

of time. This explains the dip in the reaction

temperature by about 0.30.4o F at around t = 70

mins. The lead action is again responsible for the

rather sluggish response, subsequently.

Using the approach of Ryali and Moudgalya

(1998), it has been found that noise effects will be

small if the power spectral density (PSD) of has

all its components concentrated in the high frequency region beyond 104 rad/min (26.5 Hz). To

i = 0.8, 1/hf = 0.004, noiseless measurement

Fig. 7. Jacket inlet temperature: Winter operation, i = 0.8, 1/hf = 0.004; Solid line - actual

profile; Circles - ideal profile

test this conjecture, as suggested by Astrom and

Wittenmark (1994, page 153), a high frequency

sinusoidal noise signal with amplitude 0.2o F and

frequency 2650 Hz was added to the temperature

measurement. Simulation results have confirmed

this conjecture to be true. Since temperature measurement noise is typically a high frequency signal,

it should be possible to choose a measurement

device with such noise statistics.

This controller is able to handle well 25% deviation in process delays as well.

The seriousness of the assumption of initial temperature being at the setpoint is checked now. We

would like to know whether all deviations in the

range [179 181] can be tolerated for product A.

Simulations show that the controller C(s) allows

x3 (0) to take values in the interval [179.2, 181]o F

- see Fig. 8. Since the monomer feed comes in at a

lower temperature, the reaction temperature dips

slightly below x3 (0), hence the allowable lower

bound on x3 (0) has to be at least 179.2o F .

181 deg F; Circles - x3 (0) = 179.2 deg F

involving a single-loop LTI controller and measurement of only one variable for feedback. All the

assumptions that went into the design approach

have been vindicated by the excellent performance

provided by the controller under all possible operating conditions. Additionally, this work demonstrates the ease with which FD based methods can

(a) handle realistic noise models, and (b) enable

the design of LTI controllers for tracking slowly

varying temperature trajectories, for similar batch

processes.

Performance-wise, our controller works as well

as the other solutions presented so far to this

challenge control problem. Our controller, however, has a simpler structure, needs only the reactor temperature measurement and does not need

complicated estimation techniques.

6. NOMENCLATURE

Ah

c

cpc

cpm

cps

cpw

Fm

f

hf

5. CONCLUDING REMARKS

i

k0

Kp

kvc

kvh

M Wm

mc

m

c

regulation problem of a SBEPR has been presented. The essential slowness of the unsteady

state behaviour of the given system is exploited

to design the simplest possible control structure,

mw

R

Tamb

Tinlet

Tsteam

Control valve setting (control input), %

Heat capacity of coolant in jacket,

Btu/lb/o F

Heat capacity of monomer, Btu/lb/o F

Heat capacity of solids, Btu/lb/o F

Heat capacity of water, Btu/lb/o F

Monomer addition rate, lbmol/min

Solids fraction

Fouling heat transfer coefficient,

Btu/hr/f t2 /o F

Impurity factor, dimensionless

Pre-exponential factor, min1

Heating/cooling process gain, o F/%

Valve constant - Cooling Mode

Valve constant - Heating Mode

Molecular weight of monomer, lb/lbmol

Mass of coolant in the jacket, lb

Circulation flow rate in the jacket,

lb/min

Mass of water in the reactor, lb

Rangeability of the valve

Ambient temperature, o F

Water inlet temperature, o F

Temperature of steam, o F

Btu/f t2 /min/o F

U Aloss Heat loss to environment per unit temperature, Btu/min/o F

x1

Number of moles of the monomer in the

reactor, lbmol

x2

Mass of solids in the reactor, lb

x3

Reactor temperature, o F

x4

Jacket outlet temperature, o F

x5

Jacket inlet temperature, o F

xd

State vector, desired

H

1

2

p

Reaction viscosity, cP

Transport delay in jacket, min

Transport delay in recirculation loop,

min

Heating/cooling time constant, min

REFERENCES

Computer-Controlled Systems: Theory and

Design. second ed.. Prentice-Hall of India

Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi.

Chylla, R. W. and D. R. Haase (1993a). Corrigenda. Comp. Chem. Eng. 17(12), 1213.

Chylla, R. W. and D. R. Haase (1993b). Temperature control of semibatch polymerization reactors. Comp. Chem. Eng. 17(3), 257264.

Clarke-Pringle, T. and J. F. MacGregor (1997).

Nonlinear adaptive temperature control of

multi-product, semi-batch polymerization reactors. Comp. Chem. Eng. 21, 13951409.

Friedland, B. (1996). Advanced Control System

Design. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Engelwood Cliffs.

Helbig, A., O. Abel, A. Mhamdi and W. Marquardt (1996). Analysis and nonlinear model

predictive control of the chylla-haase benchmark problem. In: Proceedings of Control.

(Presented in UKACC International Conference on Control 1996, Exeter, England, 2-5

Sept. 1996). pp. 11721177.

Ryali, V. (1994). Control system design: Tackling uncertainty with QFT. Masters thesis.

Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur.

Ryali, V. and K. M. Moudgalya (1998). Robust

temperature control of a semibatch polymerization reactor: Frequency domain specifications. Colloids and Surfaces. A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects 133, 6368.

Appendix A. VALUES OF PARAMETERS

6400

G1 (2, 1) = (ik0 e

6400

x3 +460

G1 (3, 1) = (ik0 e

6400

x3 +460

)M Wm x1

x1

+ (Hp ))

D(x)

G1 (3, 2) = ((x4 + x5 ) 2x3 )/(2D(x))

(x4 + x5 ) 2x3

2mc cpc

(x4 (t 2 ) + x5 (t 2 )) 2x3 (t 2 )

G1 (5, 2) =

2mc cpc

G1 (4, 2) =

0.4 (x)

U (x)Ah (x)

G2 (1) = Fm , G2 (2) = 0

G2 (3) = (M Wm Fm cpm (Tamb 2x3 )

+ (U A)loss (Tamb x3 ))/(D(x))

G2 (4) = (x5 (t 1 ) x4 )m

c /mc

G2 (5) = (x5 (t 1 2 ) x4 (t 2 ))m

c /mc

+ ((x4 (t 2 ) x5 ) + Kp )/p

D(x) = (x1 M Wm cpm + x2 cps + mw (0)cpw )

F (x) =

c(t)

0 c(t) 49

kvc (R)( 50 ) (Tinlet x5 )

c(t) = 50

Kp = 0

k h (R)( c(t)

50 2) (T

steam x5 ) 51 c(t) 100

v

is denoted as pij in the following:

p11 = (i

k0 )e6400/(x3d +460)

= (i

k0 )e6400/(x3d +460) x1d (t)

= M Wm p11

= M Wm p13

= p11 [M Wm (cpm cps )x3d

+ (Hp )]/D(xd (t))

Ah (U A)loss + p21 x1d (t)(cpm cps )]

p33 = [ U

p13

p21

p23

p31

Ah )/(2D(xd (t)))

p34 = (U

Ah )/(2D(xd (t)))

p35 = (U

Ah )/(mc cpc )

p43 = (U

Ah )/(2mc cpc )

p44 = (2m

c cpc U

Ah )/(2mc cpc )

p45 = (2m

c cpc U

Ah )/(mc cpc )

p53 = (U

Ah p + 2mc cpc )/(2mc cpc p )

p54 = (2m

c cpc p U

Ah p 2mc cpc (1 + 2 ))

p55 = (2m

c cpc p U

/(2mc cpc p )

where

6400

(x3d + 460)2

= 2Fm M Wm cpm - Over the feed phase

= 0 - Over the hold phase

captures the discontinuous behaviour of p33 (t)

exhibited while switching from the feed phase to

the hold phase, and vice versa. The ith element

of the Q matrix (5 1) of Eq. 10 is denoted

as qi and the individual elements are given as,

q1 = q2 = q3 = q4 = 0, q5 = 1 /p .

- CONTROL AND MONITORINGUploaded byNebojsa Kristof
- EEE 352 Automatic Control Systems General Course InformationUploaded byZeynal Abidin Şabaş
- Control Lab All Exp and Reports in Single PDF [Abdullah Ibn Mahmud]Uploaded byAnik Paul
- From PID to Active Disturbance Rejection ControlUploaded bydlginoya007
- Design of Multi-objective Robust HVDC Supplementary Controller Based on Global SignalUploaded bysherif_helmy
- Reference Tracking Control of Hypersonic Vehicles Using Switched Linear Parameter-Varying Approach _IEEEUploaded byP_lee
- 2000 IEEE TCST Canudas PralyUploaded byfoufoua
- Special Section_ Know when to look outside the PID tuning - ISA.pdfUploaded bykumar_chemical
- Automation 1Uploaded byMauro Mendes de Mello
- Nonlinear Predictive Proportional Integral Controller for Multiple Time ConstantsUploaded byIJIRAE- International Journal of Innovative Research in Advanced Engineering
- 2013_SysTol_v3Uploaded byEduardo Sanchez Fontes
- DC Motor Position and PID Parametros Do Atuador Motor DCUploaded byRudnei Barbosa
- Lpm 3_2 IntroductionUploaded bySayhello11
- Model predictive control of DFIG-based wind turbines.pdfUploaded byManuel Lara Ortiz
- pmsm speed controlUploaded byKushagra Khamesra
- PID2DOF.pdfUploaded bySamantha Brown
- Eee342 Assi Sep2014Uploaded byKRISHNAPRIYA
- dsc_exercises.pdfUploaded bysamielmadssia
- 250269Uploaded byAnonymous WkbmWCa8M
- PDC lab 8Uploaded byMustafa Barwaniwala
- NEW SYSPS.docxUploaded byRajKumarRock
- Ni This Control 1Uploaded bySarvjeet Kumar
- Robust Back Stepping Control of IM Drives Using Artificial Neural NetworksUploaded bysajs201
- Stochastic Speed Governor based on the Generalized Minimum Variance ControllerUploaded byrodrigo_trentini
- Paper 3 Annexure 2.pdfUploaded byraja
- CCP qp.docxUploaded byShaik Roshan
- normeyrico2001Uploaded byNguyễnĐạt
- a228326.pdfUploaded byRocketoRussia
- Trinity292(Science)Uploaded bySachin Chakradhar
- Improving Stability and Performance of Digitally Controlled Systems the Concept of Modified HoldsUploaded bybaobabbob

- Switch Mode Power Supply Ref. ManualUploaded bymkshahzad751362
- A Study on the Generation of Silicon-based HardwarUploaded byAnonymous Ek100RdbcH
- Applications of Robust Control to Nonlinear SystemsUploaded byAnonymous Ek100RdbcH
- Practical-Feedback-Loop-Design-Considerations-for-Switched-Mode-Power-Supplies.pdfUploaded byMari Kannan
- Writing C Code for the 8051[1]Uploaded byantnbee
- Section 3 - WindingsUploaded byPablo Kuziw
- A4403-CurrentModeControllerBuckConverterUploaded byAnonymous Ek100RdbcH
- Spiegel - Fourier Analysis (Schaum Outline)Uploaded bySaagnik Paul
- For Switching LloydH. DixonUploaded bycpsrinivasu1221569
- Lg Chas.cl-64 Flat.l1730ssftUploaded byAnonymous Ek100RdbcH
- Lg Tft-lcd Color Monitor Flatron w1934sUploaded bySlim Carranza Salvador
- National Semiconductor Linear Applications Handbook 1994Uploaded byAarti Masal
- ISP Flash Microcontroller Programmer Ver 3Uploaded byAnonymous Ek100RdbcH
- Inductor and FlybackUploaded byvictor1511
- TI_3_slup199Uploaded byAnonymous Ek100RdbcH
- x'merUploaded byvatsal
- mcb517Uploaded byDiocleciano Dantas
- C algorithm for real-time DSP.pdfUploaded bydhananjayan89
- The Basic embedded concepts for 8051 architecture.Uploaded bysssampath
- 8051 Interrupt VectorUploaded byArup Sarkar
- plcsUploaded byMAX PAYNE
- 73-4384Uploaded byAnonymous Ek100RdbcH
- [phd 1994] three-phase power conversion using soft-switching pwm techniqueUploaded byAnonymous Ek100RdbcH
- Project #1 Sine-∆ Pwm InverterUploaded byAnonymous Ek100RdbcH

- Alternating Series and absolute convergenceUploaded byRohitPachat
- HW2 - StatsUploaded byRohanBeri
- Logic DesignCh05Uploaded byAkshay Nagar
- MATLAB workshop lecture 1.pptUploaded byMahesh Babu
- ENG 1005 Notes (Mathematics)Uploaded bySiddhant
- BarronsCalculus-Set12 MCQUploaded byPeter HyungJun Yoon
- Searching for Patterns _ Set 3 (Rabin-Karp Algorithm) - GeeksforGeeksUploaded byAnonymous uzIdDk9oQ
- ilcs.pp4Uploaded byAnonymous s6fLhQ
- EnglishUploaded byAnna Myka
- scheme of work math f3Uploaded byNor Kamsiah Kamarul Jaeh
- 2. Midterm 2010Uploaded byhimanshubahmani
- Calculus PDFUploaded byJonnyy12
- (Progress in Mathematical Physics 24) Jan Cnops (Auth.)-An Introduction to Dirac Operators on Manifolds-Birkhäuser Basel (2002)Uploaded byRoberto Huaranca
- Probability statsUploaded byRenz Anthony Espino
- 2011 Herrera KAISUploaded byBinYuQLI
- 10[2].1.1.127Uploaded byprasanthraju
- MH State Class X MathsI_Sample_PaperUploaded byPham Thi Thanh Thuy
- Goethe & Schopenhauer on MathematicsUploaded bylgibson03
- An Introduction to RUploaded byGNag R'Varma
- Books for GateUploaded bysantosh290
- Some studies on algebraic integers in Q(i, √ 3) by using coset diagramUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- g7m3 end of module study guide solving equations and inequalitiesUploaded byapi-276774049
- Algebraic Operations With the HP 49 GUploaded byMaría Soledad Regidor
- Detroit Case StudyUploaded bySilvia Massi
- 3dGeometryUploaded byAmino file
- Vector AnalysisUploaded bysnigdha bose
- KL 1 RussianCircularSlideRuleUploaded byEl Rulo
- Lecture 06 Dynamic Programming(1) 1Uploaded byLucy Evrett
- Cost Minimization of MaxCity ClinicUploaded byGaurav Arora
- Qualitative MethodsUploaded byvsuarezf2732